Checkpoint to review the interpretation of source data

Background and Strategy

Many source data integrations are sufficiently complicated that a deliberate pause to review the interpretation of source data, and to settle on an appropriate implementation plan for the remaining integration steps, is warranted before the Semantic Mapping object development begins.

The basic idea is to have an experienced integration engineer not already part of the integration effort take a fresh look at the source data; hear how the primary team has interpreted those data; hear how they plan to execute the remaining steps in the integration -- i.e., the creation of semantic mapping objects, data mastering, and the provisional sequence of local transform objects they have in mind; and offer constructive feedback.

The centerpiece of this checkpoint should be a series of boards on key source data objects or data exploration objects containing Case Review elements that, ideally, usefully organize and clarify the structure of the source data. For transactional claims data, the primary team's theory of how to reconcile to final action will likely dominate the conversation, as it is often the most complicated single component of an integration, and the boards should reflect this focus.

Detailed Implementation Guidance

1. The recommended format for this checkpoint is a meeting lasting roughly an hour, with the primary integration team presenting a series of prepared boards to the reviewer and briefing the reviewer on their intended plan and any outstanding questions. The reviewer should not need additional preparation in advance of the meeting.
2. To the extent there are unresolved questions after this initial session, a plan can be made for additional investigations by the primary integration team and for a follow-up session.
3. Once all questions have been resolved, the reviewer should briefly document (e.g., as a series of summary bullet points) their understanding of the integration plan as agreed upon in the meeting. This summary will serve both to surface miscommunications from the meeting with the primary team (who should review this summary when completed) and as a useful refresher for the reviewer to prepare for the next checkpoint (see Checkpoint to review the implementation of semantic mapping and data mastering).